General Cycling DiscussionHave a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

To: UCI and IOC
"We" (the undersigned) would like to register our surprise that the UCI (International Cycling Union) has agreed to the decision of the IOC (International Olympic Committee) to scrap the Track Men's Kilometre Time Trial and the Women's 500m Time Trial. This could severely damage the sport of track cycling, will curtail the careers of many dedicated track cyclists and could impact on public funding for track cycling in the form of either direct state funding or indirect state funding via sports governing bodies or Olympic programmes. We call on the UCI to rescind its decision and to inform the IOC that different cycling events will be put forward for deletion instead.

Another place to express (well spoken) outrage would be Here for the next 30 hours or so. Perhaps if a great percentage of questions for the President of the IOC are demands for an explanation it will get thier attention.
My own question for the president:

Why has the IOC in conjunction with the UCI
terminated a traditional medal event namely the
Mens 1 kilometer (Womens 500) time trial event
in order to add "BMX" events to the 2008
Olympics? Is the IOC responsible for upholding
the traditions of Olympic competition or
following a simpler mandate of swaying to the
winds of what is popular at any given time?

The track events have gained unprecedented
popularity in North America and Japan in recent
years, to tear down an event with a long history
in order to placate sponsors seems like very bad
judgement for a body with the responsibilities
the IOC claims.

How can eliminating only two very popular
medals suddenly make it possible
to provide for "BMX" events? Why should there not
be both?

The UCI's decision to eliminate the men's and women's sprint time trials has caught administrators completely by surprise, as most thought it would be the men's and women's points races that would be sacrificed to make way for BMX.

The process imposed by the International Olympic Committee is that to allow BMX events to be held in Beijing in 2008, cycling must take out two existing events. The theory is that it will reduce athlete numbers and keep a lid on costs for the host nation.

However, it's a flawed and illogical process by any measure. Like the entry of MTB events at the expense of the road team time trials, it takes more money to build new venues and only increases the costs for the host nation, whose only saving is that they don't have to forge two extra sets of medals. Who are they kidding?

There could be some political brinkmanship here by the UCI; killing the 'kilo' will lead to justifiable outrage. It may force the IOC to reconsider its conditions, because adding BMX will certainly increase the costs of staging an Olympics.

Instead, there is a cruel sacrifice of two events that are absolute tests of the all-bets-are-off and no-excuses racing that is the heart and soul of track cycling.

This is like athletics dumping the 100 metres sprint. And then there are we poor punters. Look at what we have just lost.

The countdown of riders in the men's 'kilo' and women's 500 metre time trials, as they each have one crack at putting down the fastest time, can be one of the most exciting events in a track cycling program, offering this unique mixture of suspense and action unlike any other event. It's in the "can't miss" category.

Over the years, we have seen and heard the crowds build their support for their favoured rider as he or she walks up to the starting gate, with chanting around the velodrome, clapping, stamping of feet. The tension is palpable. Eventually, and usually with some coaxing from the announcer, the crowd falls silent as they all join the rider and wait for the five-second countdown until the gun fires.

And when it does fire, the energy from the crowd almost matches that of the rider as they burst out of the gate, every sinew of muscle straining to crank their huge gears up to speed. The men snort, hiss and wheeze as these human beings pump out over two kilowatts of power into the pedals. No rider in this event crosses the line ever feeling 'fresh'. They're cooked, and at an Olympics, they can condense four years of training into less than a minute of sustained effort.

This is track cycling is its most purest form. Man or woman against the clock, and the crowd watching every pedal stroke, with an eye on the clock as they also estimate whether the rider is going to make the best time.

These are not obscure, outdated and irrelevant events. They are highlights. Every Briton would have leapt for joy when the flying Scotsman, Chris Hoy pounded around the boards in the Athens Velodrome and bettered - yet again - this incredible succession of record-breaking rides in the 2004 kilo. Then there was Anna Meares' world-record breaking ride in the women's 500m time trial. This journalist cannot recall a more animated and genuinely excited Phil Liggett describe that one, and our 'voice of cycling' has seen his share of bike races.

Indeed, the kilo is one of the foundation events from the first modern Olympics.

This is not to deny BMX its place in an Olympics. Indeed, bring it in. But the UCI's decision to cut these two track events, and leave female sprinters with only one event, is hardly consistent with maintaining growth of the sport, and helping host nations keep a lid on costs. It won't cut costs, it won't reduce the number of athletes, all it will do is take away two of track cycling's most prized medals.

In terms of athlete numbers, the sprinters that rode the kilo and 500m in Athens all doubled up for other events. Their successors will continue to fill the athletes' village, and they'll all still need a velodrome, an expensive facility that most Olympic host cities struggle to justify after the Games.

Adding BMX therefore simply increases the number of athletes and venues that cycling requires at the Olympics. It's as through the UCI has deliberately given the finger to the IOC. "Right, we have to drop a discipline? We'll drop one that saves you exactly no money at all. Ha! Take that!" Oookayy...

The decision fails to achieve the objective. Simon Clegg, the chief executive of the British Olympic Association, told the Times newspaper, "My reaction is one of considerable disappointment because the one kilometre time-trial is an event in which we have enjoyed so much success.

"However, we have to accept that if a new discipline comes into the Games then the international federation has to remain within its numbers and effectively rejig its programme."

This is what we journalists call, "absolute cobblers."

As a representative of the people who've paid good money to watch these amazing athletes in action, the UCI and the IOC are wrong. This is our sport they are killing, and who gave them the right to do that?

Another place to express (well spoken) outrage would be Here for the next 30 hours or so. Perhaps if a great percentage of questions for the President of the IOC are demands for an explanation it will get thier attention.
My own question for the president:

Why has the IOC in conjunction with the UCI
terminated a traditional medal event namely the
Mens 1 kilometer (Womens 500) time trial event
in order to add "BMX" events to the 2008
Olympics? Is the IOC responsible for upholding
the traditions of Olympic competition or
following a simpler mandate of swaying to the
winds of what is popular at any given time?

The track events have gained unprecedented
popularity in North America and Japan in recent
years, to tear down an event with a long history
in order to placate sponsors seems like very bad
judgement for a body with the responsibilities
the IOC claims.

How can eliminating only two very popular
medals suddenly make it possible
to provide for "BMX" events? Why should there not
be both?

The "pose a question to Jacques Rogge" bit is interesting. Ask away and see what happens. I did. Hope this topic gets picked.

Signed and irritated. Why can't there be both? The Games are all about $$, marketing, and exposure anymore and they insist they must cap the number of events? In eliminating two events they're suppressing the development of the eliminated sports to new generations. Congratulations. Maybe we need some women track racers to unzip their track suits and flex for the cameras.

it's sad that they would replace the sprint event with a subjectively scored event. IMO, i think bringing in more events which do not have standard ways to time or score is a mistake. it makes year to year records almost pointless and discredits the entire concept. olympic records should stand the test of time.

it's a stupid decision all round. sacrificing track events when you've already built the velodrome in which to stage them will not save any significant amount of money. it's a bad move brought about by beaurocracy at its worst - let's hope our voices can reverse the decision.

very frustrating article - basically saying that they are following TV figures and that federations without specialist in the event voted it down. the new prez-elect seems to agree to everything and then when the heat is on wants to divert attention back to the IOC. pretty weak if you ask me.

I guess the popularity of track bikes isn't directly corollary to the popularity of track racing... its a shame really... I would surmise track biking is growing faster at this point than bmx racing anyways (which has already achieved and since passed its zenith).

I can see why BMX racing is to be introduced, I guess it's a legitimate sport now and it shows the IOC as being down with the kids.
But taking th
e kilo out whilst there are still sports like synchro swimming...